I can't rotate the helicopters it's when moving?

[jermin 0]

I can't rotate the helicopters (apply left or right pedal) when it's moving in the game. But in the demo movie of LockOn: Black Shark, the Ka-50 can do it very easily. As a result, I can't adjust my heading accurately when I am attacking the ground. Are you sure this is real?

[mechastalin 0]

I think its a problem with the ArmA flight model a bit, but the KA-50 is one of the few helicopters that can do a full flat turn at any speed, conventional tail rotor choppers have to do it at lower speeds.

[ColonelSandersLite 0]

First, wrong board.

Second, you are correct.

The heli rudders in arma are flat wrong. It won't be fixed either as far as I know. Last I heard the official line was that it's good enough since this isn't a heli sim. If you ask me, that's bullshit. I don't need it to be dead on ball's accurate representation of RL. It should however be able to give you roughly the capabilities that a real heli should have since half of a helicopter's maneuverability comes from the rudder. Hell, even the wright brothers knew how important rudder would be to an aircraft.

[jermin 0]

Sorry to hear that. I just started to fly these helicopters and it is really a good fun. But the wrong rudder bug make the helicopter almost useless. Hope BIS will fix it in the next patch.

BTW, does Arma support multi joystick?

[M.Andersson(SWE) 4]

Well...

A military sim should include TRUE Helicoptermanouverabiliy.

Including correct rudders.

It IS supposed to be THE best militarysim ever, so...BIS

What do you say...Wanna live up to YOUR own statement?

[Shadow NX 1]

In the last Demo the rudders worked pretty well even at higher speeds and that finally felt right for me, wasnt close to the super easy OFP flying but it was lot better.

Now at 1.08 i think its as worse as ever its just plain annoying if you have to slow down totally ( or at least somwhere under 70-80 ) to turn around.

Now people will say oh its realistic learn to fly... well if we are at the realistic thing i got a dozent of things to mention that arent very realistic in ArmA so why does it have to be with the flight controls.

[ColonelSandersLite 0]

Actually, it's not realistic. The rudder is wrong. That's all there is to it.

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

Actually, it's not realistic.  The rudder is wrong.  That's all there is to it.

It is realisitic, its just that BIS made the 'cutoff' point atwhich the rudder becomes ineffective far too low.

[ColonelSandersLite 0]

I don't see how that contradicts what I said exactly?

[maddogx 13]

I don't see how that contradicts what I said exactly?

You said it's not realistic, and he contradicted you by saying that it is .

You're right though, he did contradict himself aswell to a certain extent. I think what Rocko was trying to say is that the system in ArmA is not necessarily unrealistic, it just needs some adjusting.

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

I don't see how that contradicts what I said exactly?

You said it's not realistic, and he contradicted you by saying that it is   .

You're right though, he did contradict himself aswell to a certain extent. I think what Rocko was trying to say is that the system in ArmA is not necessarily unrealistic, it just needs some adjusting.

Exactly right.  But I dont see where I contradicted myself.  The loss of rudder authority is a real aspect of helicopter flight.  just not at as low speed as BIS have made it.

[mcnools 62]

Couldn't this be reconfigured?

[Shadow NX 1]

Think we should take this request to the devs question is how.

If everyone PMs a Dev about it it will just annoy them and by this one thread not much is going to happen.

Could maybe one of the guys that have the proper technical language contact a Dev like Suma or Maruk and explain to them what we would like to request?

Suma answered to my last suggestion so the PM wont be unnoticed at least.

[dm 9]

Or you could use the bug tracker, which is what its meant for

[Lor 0]

Is it fairly accurate for things like the blackhawk and MH-6?

I realise that the KA-50 is supposed to be able to yaw easily at high speed, but does the same apply for the other helicopters?

Perhaps BIS just need to adjust the rudder authority for the KA-50.

I'd be very concerned that any adjustment to all choppers would take the problem in the -other- direction by allowing -too- much yaw at high speed.

I mean, in FSX in the Bell, you can't really yaw very well at high speed, just like in ArmA.

[Comradesniper 0]

We need someone with real life experience of flying helicopters in here. Then we can get rid of the hypothetical arguments that seem to dog realism topics.

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

We need someone with real life experience of flying helicopters in here. Then we can get rid of the hypothetical arguments that seem to dog realism topics.

I've already had this discussion with a few actual helicopter pilots.  The answer is always the same.

Quote[/b] ]All helicopters handle differently.  Aircraft with smaller fuselages and larger engines usually have the ability to yaw at higher speeds.  Larger and especially longer airframes present a problem, as they act like an airbrake when trying to turn, slowing the aircraft.â€

Quote[/b] ]Larger aircraft usually have much longer fuselages, placing the tail rotor well aft of the main rotor hub.  This means that the torque required affect yaw is much less, meaning you can use a lighter, less powerful engine to do the same job as a larger one. If you were to have a long slender helicopter such as a smaller gunship [eg cobra] that would or could imply that it would have a wide yaw envelope at speed. [ie it can turn at high speeds]

So for those not technically minded the upshot is this: A small helicopter such as the Littlebird should have more rudder authority at higher speed than a Blackhawk.  Since the ArmA engine does not differentiate between aircraft types (now there is a feature I’d like) what is needed is an increase in the speed limit set by the game engine.

For the future, in the next patch maybe, the ability to define the speed at which you lose rudder authority would be very cool.  It would mean that you could further tailor the handling of helicopters.  Almost in the same way as its possible to trim the pitch and role handling of fixed wing aircraft currently ingame.

EDIT - 2nd quote added for clarity.

[ColonelSandersLite 0]

That's true of course, and you also have other features that modify that behaviour to some extent on some helicopters. For example, an angled tail plane means you need to use less rudder input to keep the aircraft on the ball at higher speeds. That means you get more couter torque authority at speed than a similar aircraft with a straight tail plane, but less authority into the torque.

One thing I have to admit is that I have no clue how the rudder authority of a chinook should be. It's very different from your more standard design.

[-ZG-BUZZARD 0]

Compared to 1.04, I think 1.08 helicopter directional handling has been improved in all aspects except for rudder...

Though, to be honest, BIS should put up the use of a joystick as a mandatory requirement since unlike in OFP, trying to fly a helicopter or a plane in ArmA with your keyboard WILL make the enemy die of laughter...

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

BUZZARD @ June 15 2007,16:47)]Compared to 1.04, I think 1.08 helicopter directional handling has been improved in all aspects except for rudder...

Though, to be honest, BIS should put up the use of a joystick as a mandatory requirement since unlike in OFP, trying to fly a helicopter or a plane in ArmA with your keyboard WILL make the enemy die of laughter...

I'd agree with you, although I still don’t like the way the Helos roll now.  I really don’t think they should have bowed to pressure.  The roll from the rotor hub wasn’t realistic at low speeds and I will admit looked a bit odd but at higher speeds and high angles of bank it was spot on.

After watching various people flying or trying to fly helicopters in Evolution recently I'm tempted to agree.  It’s obvious who flies with keyboard and mouse.  I know I’ve been incapacitated from laughing a few times watching people trying to land whilst under fire.

[dmitri 0]

After watching various people flying or trying to fly helicopters in Evolution recently I'm tempted to agree. It’s obvious who flies with keyboard and mouse. I know I’ve been incapacitated from laughing a few times watching people trying to land whilst under fire.

Weird. I find the keyboard and mouse far less "work" (and far easier..) than using a joystick.

That's helicopters though. Planes are another matter..

[Guggy 0]

I played OFP awhile back again, after alot of requests for changing to the OFP flight model had been made. I wanted to see just what they meant, as I wasnt a big fan of the OFP model at the time. What I noticed is that while you indeed lose rudder authority at speed, you dont lose it in the same way.

You cant turn as SHARPLY with rudder at higher speed, but you can in fact hold the rudder and proceed to turn for as long as you'd like. And in the process your heading will change along with it. In ArmA, you can sort of point your nose AT AN ANGLE for a bit via rudder, but that only goes so far. Then you'll be flying diagonally. In fact upon releasing the rudder, you'll snap back to the original heading while in OFP you would have been slowly changing heading the whole time the rudder was being used to turn.

Is my stick misconfigured maybe? All I know is that in OFP and Enemy Engaged: Comanche vs Hokum there isnt that little quirk in there.

[Hunin 0]

Your observations are correct.

And to make a long story short: It's not a bug in ArmA.

To explain it I first need to adress the orginial problem.

The rudder authority is very restricted in high speeds.

This means that you cannot quickly change your direction of motion .

It is a misconception that the Ka-50 can turn on a dime.

It can however yaw the nose very rapidly.

How that?

The helicopter moves into a certain direction with a given force.

This force is generated by the collective.

If the pilot steps onto the rudder he basicly cuts or adds power to the tail rotor ( or one of the 2 main rotors in case of the Blackshark).

This yaws the fuselage because of the rotation force of the main rotor.

So if a pilot yaws he does not automaticaly change the collective and therefor does not automaticaly change the direction of movement.

From second 30 onwards you can see it pretty nicely in this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEULmkKbw0Y

The whole process is a matter of engine power ( the Ka-50 having plenty of it) - but this kind of manouvering isn't only for double Rotor systems; I remember seeing a Bundeswehr UH Tiger

doing exactly the same thing on the last ILA in Berlin.

So BIS has it correct that in ARMA you move the fuselage in relation to the direction of movement, rather then the miracle

rudder turn from OFP.

The point where your angle of rudder authority decreases is the point were the airflow ( speed ) is a greater force then the power capabilitys of your tail rotor.

Depending on Helo this point should be present at an average 270 km/h.

I have the strong feeling that rudder and collective are not really seperated by the engine to enable mouse and keyboard users to "somehow" get into the air.

But it is the same problem with the planes.

They have zero rudder authority.

[shadow 6]

Moving to General

[Dallas 9]

I fly with mouse and keyboard, I fly well.